America's #1 Online Cigar Auction
first, best, biggest!

Last post 5 years ago by delta1. 88 replies replies.
2 Pages<12
Iran Nuke Deal
tailgater Offline
#51 Posted:
Joined: 06-01-2000
Posts: 26,185
Phil222 wrote:
Why it’s impossible to hide nuclear work in 24 days – or 24 years

http://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate/2015/08/13/why-its-impossible-to-hide-nuclear-work-in-24-days-or-24-years/

"The bottom line is that it is almost impossible to get away with messing around with nuclear materials. Nuclear fingerprints are not removable."

“You cannot get rid of them by cleaning,” Stephan Vogt, head of the atomic agency’s Environmental Sample Laboratory told Reuters in 2013. “You cannot dilute them to the extent that we will not be able to pick them up. It is just a matter of time,” he stated, before the atomic energy agency detects any incriminating residue."

"Twenty-nine top U.S. scientists — including Nobel Prize winners, senior experts in arms control and former White House science advisers – wrote to President Barack Obama this past weekend to praise the Iran deal. They called it “technically sound, stringent and innovative.” Instead of listening to the complaints about the 24-day meme, Congress should pay heed to these experts."


They don't have to hide nuclear work.
They just have to hide weaponry.


Iran sits on top of an oil reserve that allows them to burn 24/7 and sell to the world practically forever.
Why would they even need nukes if not for bombs?

If we could turn snow into energy, wouldn't we be curious if Antarctica wanted nuclear capabilities?

frankj1 Offline
#52 Posted:
Joined: 02-08-2007
Posts: 44,211
electricity?
tailgater Offline
#53 Posted:
Joined: 06-01-2000
Posts: 26,185
Phil222 wrote:
TG, did we really give them $250 billion?

I thought that the money Iran recieved was technically theirs anyways, (frozen money, and money from an unfulfilled weapons deal from before the Iranian people overthrew our puppet over there). I think Obama actually paid them way less than what we could have ended up owing them. I'm not an expert on this deal, but it seemed like one of Obama's better accomplishments to me. (Might not have happened without U.S. involvement)

I have not been following the news; has Trump mentioned what he disliked about the deal or what he plans to do to improve upon it?


It appears that we did NOT give that much.
I'm confusing some recent figures on a separate Iran issue.

It's more likely to be much less.
But in addition to the lifted sanctions that freed Iranian money, it's understood that we gave Iran almost $2B in US Cash.

This is why I like Phil's posts.
They always make me confirm my "memory" on things.

I must have been told a million times not to exaggerate.

delta1 Offline
#54 Posted:
Joined: 11-23-2011
Posts: 28,754
Can't have nuclear weaponry without plutonium...

I'm not a nuclear scientist (far from it, got a D in college Chemistry), but enriching uranium to produce weapon-grade plutonium leaves detectable and identifiable radioactive "fingerprints." That's one of the signs the inspectors look for with their advanced test equipment. Tiny amounts of radio-active substances can trip a PPD/alarm that techs who work with RA materials wear to detect unsafe levels in a university lab, and the inspectors have far more advanced tools.

And the process requires massive infrastructure...it's not like the movies where the megalomaniac's ace mad scientist (Tony Stark?) can make a nuclear bomb in a small underground lab. Enrichment facilities are much like nuclear power plants....massive facilities. We need an engineer here to do a better job of 'splaining why the experts all signed off on a 24 day notice.

here's a somewhat helpful article that kinda spells out the process:

https://thebulletin.org/converting-civilian-enrichment-plant-nuclear-weapons-material-facility
frankj1 Offline
#55 Posted:
Joined: 02-08-2007
Posts: 44,211
frankj1 wrote:
electricity?

why yes, Frank, you are correct.
delta1 Offline
#56 Posted:
Joined: 11-23-2011
Posts: 28,754
frankj1 wrote:
electricity?


exactricity...
delta1 Offline
#57 Posted:
Joined: 11-23-2011
Posts: 28,754
tailgater wrote:
It appears that we did NOT give that much.
I'm confusing some recent figures on a separate Iran issue.

It's more likely to be much less.
But in addition to the lifted sanctions that freed Iranian money, it's understood that we gave Iran almost $2B in US Cash.

This is why I like Phil's posts.
They always make me confirm my "memory" on things.

I must have been told a million times not to exaggerate.



by whom...
frankj1 Offline
#58 Posted:
Joined: 02-08-2007
Posts: 44,211
delta1 wrote:
by whom...

Michael Cohen?
Phil222 Offline
#59 Posted:
Joined: 10-01-2017
Posts: 1,911
tailgater wrote:
it's understood that we gave Iran almost $2B in US Cash.

I’m pretty sure that $2B was money that was legally owed from a weapons deal that fell through over there.

I forget where I read this, but we were about to be on the hook for way more than $2B...like $7B because of interest or something crazy like that??...now I’m exaggerating... and we negotiated it down to that figure.

I’m not 100 on that, but basically that is what I’m remembering...my point being that we didn't just hand over unwarranted bags full of tax dollars. It was really their money and whether or not we should have given it to them, I guess that's still up for debate.

I just don't see the harm of staying in this agreement, nor the benefits of soft power moves that have garnered little results in the past, like sanctions. From my perspective, this agreement has been serving its purpose, but I could be wrong.

I have underestimated Trump in the past and he has surprised me. I hope this is another one of those instances.
tailgater Offline
#60 Posted:
Joined: 06-01-2000
Posts: 26,185
delta1 wrote:
by whom...


There is no question we gave the money.
Revisionist reporting, however, questions whether it was legal, owed to them, a hostage trade, related to military weapons, or tainted with disease ala exploding cigars to Castro.


Phil222 Offline
#61 Posted:
Joined: 10-01-2017
Posts: 1,911
Those foreign dictators fall for the ole exploding cigar trick every time...After a second look at the details of that payment to Iran, it does leave me with some unanswered questions and feeling a little disconcerted. Either way, it still doesn’t alter my opinion of the overall merit of the Iran Deal.
delta1 Offline
#62 Posted:
Joined: 11-23-2011
Posts: 28,754
tailgater wrote:
There is no question we gave the money.
Revisionist reporting, however, questions whether it was legal, owed to them, a hostage trade, related to military weapons, or tainted with disease ala exploding cigars to Castro....or an underhanded gift to terrorists that illustrates how incompetent we were as negotiators under Okenyan




fixed...you inadvertently left that out...
tailgater Offline
#63 Posted:
Joined: 06-01-2000
Posts: 26,185
delta1 wrote:
fixed...you inadvertently left that out...


It was implied.


delta1 Offline
#64 Posted:
Joined: 11-23-2011
Posts: 28,754
Herfing Beer
frankj1 Offline
#65 Posted:
Joined: 02-08-2007
Posts: 44,211
electricity
DrafterX Offline
#66 Posted:
Joined: 10-18-2005
Posts: 98,508
I can't believe you guys think we owed them chit... Mellow
frankj1 Offline
#67 Posted:
Joined: 02-08-2007
Posts: 44,211
we didn't owe them. we gave them back their monies
ZRX1200 Offline
#68 Posted:
Joined: 07-08-2007
Posts: 60,477
With interest.
DrafterX Offline
#69 Posted:
Joined: 10-18-2005
Posts: 98,508
Did they compensate the hostages..?? Huh
frankj1 Offline
#70 Posted:
Joined: 02-08-2007
Posts: 44,211
HEY!
It's not as if I like Iran.
DrafterX Offline
#71 Posted:
Joined: 10-18-2005
Posts: 98,508
Why do you hate Iranians..?? Huh
frankj1 Offline
#72 Posted:
Joined: 02-08-2007
Posts: 44,211
just the old ones. The good ones wear Levis and stuff
DrafterX Offline
#73 Posted:
Joined: 10-18-2005
Posts: 98,508
Interesting.. Think
frankj1 Offline
#74 Posted:
Joined: 02-08-2007
Posts: 44,211
I figured the Levis kids would be in charge in 15 years.
They love the west
DrafterX Offline
#75 Posted:
Joined: 10-18-2005
Posts: 98,508
Well, we are pretty cool.. Mellow
frankj1 Offline
#76 Posted:
Joined: 02-08-2007
Posts: 44,211
yup
we are da best
delta1 Offline
#77 Posted:
Joined: 11-23-2011
Posts: 28,754
Still waiting for someone to state why it was a good idea to bail out of the Iran Nuclear Deal. What did we gain?


easy to take pot shots at arguments for staying in...but make the case for backing out...
tailgater Offline
#78 Posted:
Joined: 06-01-2000
Posts: 26,185
delta1 wrote:
Still waiting for someone to state why it was a good idea to bail out of the Iran Nuclear Deal. What did we gain?


easy to take pot shots at arguments for staying in...but make the case for backing out...


I hadn't considered that perspective.
It was a bad deal (IMO) but have we gained anything?

It's like a bad haircut.
Shaving it all off isn't always an improvement.


frankj1 Offline
#79 Posted:
Joined: 02-08-2007
Posts: 44,211
tailgater wrote:
I hadn't considered that perspective.
It was a bad deal (IMO) but have we gained anything?

It's like a bad haircut.
Shaving it all off isn't always an improvement.



well, we all tend to automatically lean in the direction that we typically side with, but what makes this case one of the more difficult issues to be sure of is most private citizens simply don't have all the facts and probably never will.
delta1 Offline
#80 Posted:
Joined: 11-23-2011
Posts: 28,754
Three reasons why private citizens are in the dark: they believe what their leaders of choice tell them; their leader of choice intentionally deceives, misleads, or misinforms them; and most private citizens aren't interested in doing the research and intellectual work to discover the facts.
frankj1 Offline
#81 Posted:
Joined: 02-08-2007
Posts: 44,211
delta1 wrote:
Three reasons why private citizens are in the dark: they believe what their leaders of choice tell them; their leader of choice intentionally deceives, misleads, or misinforms them; and most private citizens aren't interested in doing the research and intellectual work to discover the facts.

yet opinions fly...
dstieger Offline
#82 Posted:
Joined: 06-22-2007
Posts: 10,889
LOL
frankj1 wrote:
Michael Cohen?

dstieger Offline
#83 Posted:
Joined: 06-22-2007
Posts: 10,889
frankj1 wrote:
just the old ones. The good ones wear Levis and stuff



Levis?
Mossad plot? Or just awesomeness.....I suppose they've also surreptitiously got them hooked on Little Debbies and Baby Ruths....maybe some Judas Priest
delta1 Offline
#84 Posted:
Joined: 11-23-2011
Posts: 28,754
I was confused by the Michael Cohen post...coulda been one of two, both funny...but not sure....is there a third possibility, of which I am clueless?

Frank might've meant that Michael Cohen gave Iran the $2 billion US...

or, he meant ...Michael Cohen was among the people who believed the US gave Iran the $2 Billion...

so I let it go, to avoid appearing unintelligent...
dstieger Offline
#85 Posted:
Joined: 06-22-2007
Posts: 10,889
Guess I can't really speak for what he meant.....didn't keep me from laughing, though...I read it as though he ignored your question about who believes what....and twisted the 'whom' into your first answer....since Cohen is the guy passing out cash....I don't think Frank (or anyone else) really cares what Cohen believes.....better to remain silent and all that...I get it...
frankj1 Offline
#86 Posted:
Joined: 02-08-2007
Posts: 44,211
it was a guess about who gave the 2B...even made myself laugh.

anyway, I heard he got reimbursed.
frankj1 Offline
#87 Posted:
Joined: 02-08-2007
Posts: 44,211
dstieger wrote:
Levis?
Mossad plot? Or just awesomeness.....I suppose they've also surreptitiously got them hooked on Little Debbies and Baby Ruths....maybe some Judas Priest

the halal Baby Ruths are not very good.
delta1 Offline
#88 Posted:
Joined: 11-23-2011
Posts: 28,754
there you go again...lol...
Users browsing this topic
Guest
2 Pages<12